On 11/04/2016 10:20 AM, Levente Polyak wrote: > I don't think its worth trying to comfort all AUR wrappers in the > way a PKGBUILD is handled. I have seen too often including horrible > hacks here and there because one wrapper does or doesn't do X or Y and > fails.Its not as harmful because at the end its just a different pkgver > but the conclusion is the same: No gain other then to satisfy AUR > wrappers. Therefor my personal opinion is to avoid that all together no > matter if you think that it is overreacting or not.
That wasn't initially clear from what you said. :) I will stick with making sure the PKGBUILD is well-written then, and if I feel in the mood, commit the changes makepkg itself makes to the PKGBUILD. ;) (No real gain != loss) And I don't really see it as a "workaround for AUR wrappers". I see it as getting more useful information into the AUR rpc interface. It's similar to why I make sure to bump the pkgrel to trigger a rebuild for soname bumps -- and there are people who insist that AUR users should be required to check for that by hand. -- Eli Schwartz
